Talk:Code Geass/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

Removal of staff listing in the summary...

I'd like to go through the history and put this information back somewhere; soliciting suggestions as to where to put it. (under a "Staff" section?)

I have a particular vested interest in ensuring that Eiji Nakada's name is tied to the project in the article, as I find mechanical designers are regrettably overlooked by US anime enthusiasts. (Then again, this is coming from the guy who's been singlehandedly overhauling Kunio Okawara's article; guess I'm a little bit biased). --E. Megas 21:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Ashford Academy

What academic calender does the school follow? The traditional British system or the Japanese system? -Atashi 23:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Well that depends. Does the British school system start at grade one when a student first hits high school? If they don't then I would say it follows the Japanese sysem because all of the students have school grades such as 1 or 2 indicating a Japanese system or at least not an American one. Lordfani 08:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I would say its the Japanese system due to British system is about how old you are and most characters are too old for the last year of Secondary School (same as high school, year 11 is the last year of school and the students are about 16 years old) most the characters would be first year of college if they started right after school.

Jim-San 03:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


Just for reference British school tends to go like this, starting from an age roughly appropriate to the characters in Code Geass:

Compulsory: Secondary School: Split into Years 7 (students aged 11) through to Year 11 (students aged at most 16). The whole spectrum of subjects.
Option: 6th form/College: Aged 16-19, though older students are usually accepted for whatever reason. Generally pick 3 subject. This is soon to change.
Option: University: Aged 18+. I don't think I need to explain this. :)

That said, if it is meant to be British school (that is, based on real British school) then Lelouch and co. would have to be 16 or less - while they are in fact 17. That's because colleges and above don't have a dress-code, though I suppose the team could use the excuse that it's an "upper class school". It's all very tenuous anyway; while they would be either doing A Levels (college) if they were in a present day British school, since it's set in 10 years time things may well have changed by then. As I said, the A Levels are already on their way out now, so... 82.36.209.171 19:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


Characters section

The Code Geass series is still running and ongoing, so I personally think it is more suitable if a characters sub-article, if it was really necessary, be created only after the completion of the full series, so as to make the editing and improvement of the overall article easier and more organized, for the time being. When the series is completed, a characters sub-article should then be proposed for creation. Ganryuu (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe most pepole know of the old 32kb limit (if not, see Wikipedia:Article size). The current article is 40kb, which is mainly the characters section. In my opinion, it should be divided. So what if the series isn't finished yet? They already presented over 20 charcters. That surely demands it's own article! What shouldn't deserve it's own article yet is personal charcter article, but a list is fine. Again, IMO. Kurigiri 16:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
So, I tried creating a list. If there won't be any objections (or any comments, like up till now), I'll make an article for it in 3 days. Kurigiri 17:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
The series is still ongoing, therefore there is perhaps a lot of information yet to be revealed, not only characters but other factors of the series, such as terminology, the Knighmare Frames, the power of Geass, and other concepts. It is therefore much easier and more manageable for all concerned to edit and make improvements to one, organized main article, through its different sections. When the series is complete, I believe then should be the best time for other sub-articles, but not now, in my opinion. Ganryuu (talk) 12:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
As I said before, what does it matter that the series is still ongoing? That does not change the fact that they have already revealed alot of information. Besides, the series is planned to have 25 episodes. To keep it another 4 months on one article? It's already seeping out of the old limitations.
The current list is without a doubt the main core of the article, but it shouldn't. While editing the chara section, the other sections (which aren't any less important) are neglected. By dividing the characters section into an article of it's own, it'll be far easier to reach all the sections. Also, I don't understand - by cramming all the information on one article it'll be easier for editors? how? Kurigiri 14:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
As the series is an ongoing one, there is therefore indeed much left to be revealed, especially about the main characters, so I think it best a characters section be created when a complete amount of information is revealed, to provide ample space for expansion. In my humble opinion, I don't really think the other sections are being neglected, instead I actually believe they've been expanded quite well over the past few months, but I think it would be much easier to manage the overall article, for the time being, if the format is left within one article. Ganryuu (talk) 14:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
But we may never know when will new inforamtion come out, even after the of the series. Because this is an ongoing article series, it may be easier to start it's related article now, since there are some things (such as minor characters who are nothing but a first name or a last name) which shouldn't be written on the main article. Mainly since the main article should consist of the main info, like.. basic information on the main charcters, and a link to the character list.
If by keeping it in one article, you intend to "save some space", then Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia should answear that.
After a point, splitting an article into separate articles and leaving adequate summaries is a natural part of growth for a topic (see Wikipedia:Summary style).. As far as I see it, we've come to a point where we can split the article into seperate articles. Besides, we can update a character list just as good as we update the main article, just one more article on the watchlist. It is still practicly the same thing we've been doing up till now, isn't it? Kurigiri 15:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Any comments, Ganryuu? I'd like to have your agreement before creating the list, which I can't get unless you answer me :P Kurigiri 16:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Due to the article expanding rapidly and other reasons relating mostly to WP:FICTION, I decided to go ahead and split the characters section into an article of its own. Ganryuu (talk) 05:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

New Section Proposal

I propose there should be a section about the Pizza Hut sightings, or at least a mention of it, in Code Geass, because the product placement of Pizza Hut in the anime seems to have taken a role as an in-fandom meme. It's made it's mark in the Geass fandom ranging from the fansubbers webpage including a sightings list, to the main Pizza Hut article even mentioning Code Geass, to the seemingly widespread inside one-liner, "PIZZA HUT SUPPORTS THE REBELLION". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fall Showers (talk • contribs) 03:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC).

I agree! I was going to add to C-2's character information that her favourite food is pizza hut.

But if we are going to add a new section, might be best to add it there. I mean what other anime series feature a current product placement?

I bet the animators are getting free pizza for a year or something :p While Pizza Hut isn't central to the story, it is feature almost regularly thoughout the episodes so far seen.

- Onizuka-gto 15:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

While this might be rather hilarious, it is however not notable or significant enough to have it included within the article, I'm afraid. Actually, there are several notable anime series to have incorporated product placement, for example - adidas directly sponsored the 2001 series Captain Tsubasa Road to 2002 (with adidas' logo appearing on the stadium boards, even on one of the main characters, Genzo's cap, which he always wears, by the way). See adidas's official website about Captain Tsubasa. PUMA also directly sponsored Hungry Heart: Wild Striker. Ganryuu (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm also against this. While the Pizza Hut thing is amusing, the article is already big enough as it is. Please don't make it bloated with insignificant information. DarkWarrior 20:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It could probably fit in a trivia sectionThe one smiley to rule them all 04:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Isn't Pizza Hut a major sponsor of Code Geass? That should explain their placement and prominence in the series. - ULTRAZORD—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.177.15 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 3 February 2007.

Offical Names

Please don't change the names unless you're sure you're right. The current names (as many as I could find) are from an article in animage; scans here and here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.132.52.223 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC).

Simple magazine articles are not official confirmation of any kind and such scans anyway are not notable enough for inclusion into a correctly referenced article. Ganryuu (talk) 14:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, if those are the official names, they're horrible romanizaion. For example, Nanari or Nanaly would make a lot more sense then Nunnaly. If they are not from Sunrise then I agree with not including it. 70.180.165.154 11:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Guren vs Crismon

I think we should use Guren Mark 2 instead of Crismon Lotus, one of the reasons is just as GG Fansub sad“HEY, no one translated Akatsuki in Gundam SEED Destiny”. Also it is more logical to use Guren instead of Crismon because wikipedia is a encyclopedia. If GG-fansub doesn't translate it to Crismon then that piece of article wouldn't make much sense. So that's why I suggest that until other fansub groups decide what to use,whe should at least use Guren. Atilim,20 december 2006,7.45 Dutch time—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.147.106.216 (talk • contribs) 06:45, 20 December 2006.

I'd not rely on anything from fansubs, especially when only one English group is subbing Geass. If gg fansubs had another translator who preferred 'Crimson Lotus', then that would've been their release. Atashi 09:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Evens so, I still think that Guren is better because like you sad you prefer non translation and Crismon is a translation, we should stik with this to the name and not the fan name.Atilim,20 december 2006,—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.147.106.216 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 20 December 2006.

Shinsen Subs is also subbing it now, and they use Guren instead of Crimson Lotus as well. 76.16.151.80 21:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Worth adding?

Should a reference to the Geas from Celtic mythology? Yes, Original Research and all that, but I find it's more than a coincidence. I've been thinking of writing a sentence about it, but can't think where. Also, I think there should be explanations as to where the names of the mech names come from (The city of Gloucester in England, Sutherland in Scotland, etc.) Bnynms 17:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The entire series has refernces to the UK like the chess, the Brtiannian naming, Lancelot. I think it has it's own part of the article, so yeah, feel free to add it. Kurigiri 18:02, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
I totally support adding the geas/geass reference but according to a small minority of dedicated wiki'ers, large amounts of smoke billowing out of the woods does not constitute a forest fire. :p Maloncanth 04:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Where is this section then? I was also going to add that Glasgow is a famous Scottish city and that Yggdrasil (as in the cores of some of the Knightmares) is the Tree of Life.82.36.209.171 19:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Allusion to the Holy Roman Empire?

As I am sure some of you are aware, the Holy Britannia Empire is pretty much anything but its namesake (as the name itself is obviously derived from Germany's Holy Roman Empire). While it may have a 'British' facade, it definitely has a German heart. Historically, the British Empire was a naval power, rather than a land-based one. That honor, of course, belonged to the Germans.

It is also quite interesting how the producers decided to coin this show's signature mechas as the Royal Panzer Infantry, as I'd imagine the word Panzer would have been an affront to British sensitivities. Perhaps it would be better to call them ReichsPanzerInfanterie. Not to mention the ideas of competition and eugenics were both very central to National Socialist ideology.

I suppose the producers did not wish to create an authoritarian regime with a German foundation, since it may be slightly offensive, not to mention they would have had excessive difficulties with German vocabulary.

Regardless, I believe an article regarding the connections of the Holy Britannia Empire to its historical counterpart, the Holy Roman Empire, may be appropriate. - Tak—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.156.42.49 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 26 December 2006.

Completly, but I mean COMPLETLY Original Research. Kurigiri 20:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Lancelot's Slash Harken

If I'm not mistaken, there are at least two screenshots: here, here, and the cropped version of the last that show/imply that Lancelot doesn't have two, but four slash-harkens instead, two more located on its hips. Should I edit? Dr. Rondart 13:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Dr. RondartDr. Rondart 13:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Wheres Pizza Hut??

Seeing Pizza Hut is thrown everywhere, why no mention of Pizza Hut's support of the rebellion?--293.xx.xxx.xx 05:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

What is the significance of Pizza Hut to the overall plot? -Atashi 05:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Look up at the new section proposal in here - ULTRAZORD—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.177.15 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 3 February 2007.

I think it should at least be in a trivia section, as it has an abnormal amount of exposure in the series. Although I don't think they "support the rebellion" by any intent, it does come up extremely often and is the subject of a lot of curiosity. -Biokinetica 04:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Surely this is either a sponsorship that manifests itself within the episodes via product placement rather than at the traditional point at the end of the opening credits, or merely just a little tribute to Pizza Hut by fans on the animation team? I know this is even worse than anecdotal evidence, but if I had creative control over a movie or TV series, I would add in lots of little touches with beer brands and snacks brands that my friends and I enjoy. Directors often put in songs that they like or posters of their favourite movies in the background. OT, but in the X-Files movie, Mulder urinates onto a poster of Independence Day. I think it's obvious that that's all this is. 82.36.209.171 18:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I disagree that it's so obvious. Either there's something more than "we like pizza hut" behind this, or these guys are just three-topping-circle fanatics that need to find some other foods they like and want to worship through their animation. No personal director's choice gets anywhere near this amount of exposure. -Biokinetica 16:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Can there really be any question that this is sponsorship? Relatively tastefully done, and not too intrusive, I might add. --Darkbane 05:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Not having seen this anime myself...do they use the actual Pizza Hut logo in it, rather than one of the slightly-altered-so-we-don't-get-sued logos that (ie KcDonald's, etc) that seem to be standard in anime? If the real Pizza Hut logo is used, that would be a pretty clear sign of approval on Pizza Hut's part, if not outright sponsorship. — Red XIV (talk) 06:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes it is actual logo and name, not certain but i think that some eps included pizza hut in "this is sponsored by following companies" screen after intro. It is also in pizza hut article on wikipedia and Japanese wikipedia also mentions it. (on code geass article) Pahajoki 10:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

OP2 "Indecipherable"

Apparently some fans have found it to be really "Indecipherable". That is to say, not even native speakers of Japanese can make out what the song is singing about, not without a lyric sheet or sth. Some people have made videos with "alternative" and rather funny lyrics. Maybe that's good for starting a trivia section? There used to be several related videos on Youtube, but they have been removed "due to use violation". The only one I can find now is this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7ndeQMVgJM Would anybody search for alternative sites plz... try keywords like 解読不能　空耳字幕, etc. Nautilusfossil 17:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

The talk page, as detailed in the talk header, is to be used for discussing improvements to the Code Geass article, and not for general discussion regarding the article's topic. Please also see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, where it is clearly detailed: Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 17:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I was suggesting "improving" the article by adding this (possibly interesting) piece of information regarding OP2. Those comments on the lyric are not my original thought. It will not promote anything (as in soapbox), nor will it be about FAQs, travel guides, memorials, manuals, internet guides, textbooks, plot summary or the actual lyric (as in indiscriminate collection of information). However, this piece of information may be lacking in term of the "notability" criteria, having only been circulated as music videos and on various anime-related blogs. I wouldn't put it in right now. Maybe after some published work (magazine article, etc) mentions the song, it would be worth mentioning here. -Nautilusfossil 18:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Episode 22: What does the Emperor have to do with the Geass

A person bearing a great resemblance to the Emperor of Britannia appears in the first episode, during the "Contract" scene, the 18th episode(saying something of a 'mental elevator') and in episode 22, laughing and saying that the/an idiot did 'it'. We should mention the possibility of this man being the Emperor (how many have their hair like THAT?) and of his apparent knowledge about the Geass. It might have something to do with the other name of the Geass, "the power of the king". I haven't seen all of the episodes, so if someone knows something that I don't about this issue, please contact me.- Preda 20:36 27 of March 2007

Completely off-the-wall explanations aside, he's the Emperor of Britannia for sure - the appearance is identical and there has been no reason presented to believe that it is a completely different character who is merely identical in appearance. Imban 19:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Second Season

Forgive me if the answer to this question is already listed somewhere... But when will the second season start? And what will it be called? Theres a link, but I cant speak japanese... 134.117.166.69 07:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Exact details as to what form the second season will take (tv series, ova, etc), what it will be called, and when it will be aired, are currently not known. That post is a bit dated now, but it only announces a second season, without giving any details, and there hasn't been any further official announcements, as far as I know.
There has been mention of "episode 26" in a staff interview, so it's safe to assume that the second season will be episodic. Due to that same announcement's contents, it's also relatively safe to assume that there won't be any large time gap between the seasons. I've also read somewhere that it will air in the fall (so October), but this is unconfirmed and highly speculative. --Darkbane 05:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The words "second season" are not actually used by the creators. Moreover, it's misleading since implies television when the creators emphasize in the March 9 blog[1] that even they don't know what form the continuation will take. The exact term they used is "続編," which simply means "continuation" or "follow-up"—nothing specific about "season." Egan Loo 05:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
While the initial blog entry does indeed state continuation or sequel (which is more accurate, in my humble opinion, since this is a television series), further developments with the series' staff and cast and recent articles in other Japanese magazines have further confirmed upon the sequel being a television season, which is further helped by the fact that the series has been extremely popular in its television run. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 05:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Please cite those newer sources that specifically say television or "second season," or all of those "second season" assertions should be removed from the article. Even the Japanese wikipedia entry on Code Geass doesn't assert what the English page asserts about "second season." In fact, it emphasizes, like the official blog, that the exact format of the continuation is unknown. Egan Loo 05:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Recent interviews with the series' cast and staff (for example, an interview with Jun Fukuyama), have further hinted and confirmed on the fact that there will be a second season, but either way, the term "sequel" is best suited for the entry, as this is a television series, not another form of media. In my opinion, it's far more important to further improve and expand the article to a better standard, rather than worry about such minor matters as wordings. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 05:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The creators emphasize that the sequel can take the form of another media. Accuracy is more important than smoothness. If there is a interview that confirms that the sequel is a "second season" or on television, then cite it. It's that simple. Egan Loo 05:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Even after I agreed to change my wording from second season to sequel, to suit the current references, you have insisted on edit warring over this minor matter. Like I've said, the articles in Newtype, referenced in the article, talk about the sequel/continuation, so I've just said that; this is a referenced and published fact. We don't need a note which bulks the article unnecessary, especially when the published magazines have confirmed the fact it will be sequel; a published source like a magazine is more reliable than an outdated blog entry. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 06:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Again, citation please. If you have a source that says the series thus far is "first season," then please provide it. Otherwise, that should be removed to reduce uncited bulk. Egan Loo 06:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Please do not remove the following statement: "The blog cautions that the sequel's format, be it 'TV broadcast, OVA, or theatrical release,' is not confirmed." If the creators themselves see fit to write that in the beginning of the sequel announcement, then it is relevant and worthy. If the creators haven't said that the sequel is a "second season," they also haven't said that the series thus far is the "first season." Again, citation please. Egan Loo 06:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

This note is unnecessary and outdated, as the wording of the term "sequel" is as clear as possible: it is a confirmed continuation, but the exact format is not elaborated, as far as I'm concerned, that's all we need now. Like I've said, recent interviews with the show's cast, including the recent interview with Jun Fukuyama, have hinted on the sequel being a second season, so actually, it's not as confusing as the above wording might imply. A published magazine is more reliable than an outdated blog entry; please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. If another media is confirmed by MBS, we can add it to the article then, but as of now, we really don't need an ambiguous entry. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 06:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Again, if there is a newer source, cite it. Just cite that interview. That's what we need to do. Accuracy and citations are more essential than adding uncited material. Egan Loo 06:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I've just added two references to the article, further verifying the fact that the first season/series will end with episodes 24 and 25 and the confirmed second series, respectively. It is more important to improve the article and expand upon it, rather than be involved in unnecessary disagreements. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 06:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I know that Anime News Network article doesn't say that the episode 24 and 25 ends the "first season" and doesn't confirm a "second season"—I wrote the article. :) I had to point those points out to the confused readers in that article's forum thread. [2] Also, Moon Phase's maintainer emphasizes in writing that he includes unannounced information, rumors, and predictions with official information. Moon Phase is not more reliable than the official Code Geass blog from the creators. That's why the Japanese Wikipedia article on Code Geass does not say "first season" or "second season," and says instead that the format is "unspecified." Egan Loo 07:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I also have the April issue whose citation was added to the article, and Taniguchi does not say "first season." Egan Loo 07:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
"Series" and "season" do not mean the same thing. The whole issue with using the word "season" is that implies television, whereas the creators have been careful to emphasize that the format of the sequel is unspecified. Wikipedia can't used that specific term until the creators used that specific term. Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Egan Loo 07:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The exact information specified in Moonphase, which is used as a reference by numerous sources around the internet (thus being a source that can most certainly be used in the article), directly refers to the "second series", with the first 25 episodes being part of the first series or season. Either way, if we're talking about episodes 24 and 25 being part of the first season, I think it's been safely deduced that it has indeed been referred as such by numerous sources, several articles relating to Code Geass which have been published in recent months by several magazines, and of course, Moonphase; the fact is, published material have referenced this as ending the first season. You wanted a reference, and it's been given; this particular fact, I think, is pretty obvious and so a disagreement over it is unnecessary, in my humble opinion. After all, other parts of the article, such as the characters and story setting, etc. need much more improvement, and I think it's better if we spend our time improve the in-universe sections of the article. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 07:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
What is used "around the Internet" is not necessarily good enough for Wikipedia. That is why the ja:コードギアスJapanese Wikipedia on Code Geass]] doesn't say "second season." Also, as before, the published material cited does not say "first season," so it does not say what the article says. Egan Loo
If it is a verified and notable reference, such as Moonphase, which has been referenced by numerous notable sources, then yes, it can most certainly be used in the article. I would kindly refer you to see Wikipedia's policies on attribution and verifiability. Either way, if we are disagreeing about a minor matter like wordings, such as the difference between "series" and "season", then it's obvious that this does not concern improving the article anymore; therefore, I personally don't care whether or not we use the term "series" or "season", so I've changed each instances of the word "season" to "series" wherever applicable. I'm far more interested in improving other sections of the article, after expanding the non-universe and development related sections the other day, so I'd appreciate if this minor matter is over. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu 07:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
The article's wording on the sequel is fine for me now. Moon Phase is a good place to find links to the original firsthand source, but the Moon Phase maintainer specifically writes that he includes "unannounced information, rumors, and predictions." That's why we have to be careful about using Moon Phase, and why the Japanese article doesn't use it for this issue. The reason this issue is not just minor wording is that almost every time the Anime News Network posts an article about episode 24 and 25, or about the sequel, readers post something like, "Don't we already know about the second season? Everyone on the internet has been saying that for months." Then we have to explain each time that the creators haven't said "second season" yet, and that the creators themselves emphasized that they didn't know the format yet. Egan Loo 08:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

To be honest, I agree with Frenchman113 that this article could use some cleanup. The question is, what are we gonna do about it? I'm going to rearrange some stuff into subsections, but some other things need to be addressed publicly before we go about major edits:

  • Broadcast stations - this section is pretty much obsolete, might as well ditch it. It never added substantially to the article, in my humble opinion.
  • Lelouch's ability - we could go with a much more concise description here. The extensive list of restrictions on usage should be axed.
  • Staff - I propose removing this section. It does not add significantly to the article, and this information is present in the ANN anyway. Many good anime articles on en:wiki do not have such a section.
  • Drama CD - this section needs cleanup, but I'm not sure about how to approach it.

--Darkbane 01:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The details on Lelouch's ability are important to the series's overview and should not be removed; essential details on the series's plot such as this should remain. There is no need to excessively divide sections, for example, this series is an original anime series, as stated in the intro, so dividing those related to the anime into a subsection would not be useful, as almost all of the information (including story, characters, terminology, etc.) pertain to the anime. Also, whether or not an external link contains any information and whether or not other articles contain something is not relevant to this article whatsoever. It should be noted that this expansive staff list, containing essential information pertaining to the series's production, was present and translated from the excellent article at the Japanese wiki long before ANN expanded upon their list. Non-universe material related to the series's production has to be included, as it relates to how the series was produced and planned. I'll work on cleaning up the drama CD section soon, as it's only recently been added. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 12:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The only essential details are that it's a power that given eye contact will, once per person, command that person to absolute obedience. Everything else is really debatable, imho. I would argue that it's fancruft, except that Death Note contains similar information.
Moving the anime production stuff into the medial section may or may not be relevant, but I argue that the setting material still deserves it's own section for better overview. "Everything pertains to the anime" is not a good excuse imho, as it would be better to group the in-universe stuff together since there is so much of it.
When ANN expanded upon their list, or where this staff list originated, is not relevant. I'm still looking over articles containing Staff lists and over Wikipedia policiy, which, being a new editor, I'm not 100% familiar with, but I'd like more opinions on whether it deserves to be included or not.
You haven't said anything about the broadcast information - do you mind if I delete it?
--Darkbane 13:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Staff lists are highly essential details often added to articles upon translation projects from the Japanese wiki. They are highly important and relate to the series's production and are therefore of essential value to the article. See such excellent articles like High School! Kimengumi, and several other superb articles. Similarly, the list of broadcast stations was added to the article as a result of the translation, and notably relates to how the series was planned and aired, and is also therefore essential to the article. Also, material such as Knightmare Frames and Geass is not related to the series' setting, and therefore must stay in their own sections. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 06:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm bewildered by the notion that the staff list is "highly important" and "highly essential", as opposed to just being "important" or "essential" for instance :) Your overuse of the word "essential", in this reply and in others, makes me wonder if you are maybe overly biased towards content that you've added ^_^;; (I'm assuming you are responsible for the translation - please correct me if I'm wrong). I'll agree that the staff list may have "some" relevance to the article, so let's keep it. However, if it's a translation, I think it should at least cite the Japanese wiki entry.
Broadcast lists do not relate to the production but rather to the distribution of the anime. It's also not relevant information for anyone, especially not that the series has finished airing for the most part and the last two episodes are going to be schedules separately. In fact, the list is counterproductive as the way it's written implies that the series is still airing every week right now, which is not true. It also lacks citations. Unless we plan on adding a section listing every Japanese store distributing the DVD's, this section needs to go. --Darkbane 10:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, Knightmare Frames and Geass sections are most definitely related to "setting" as they describe the Code Geass universe. --Darkbane 20:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Broadcast information is definitely notable and meets each of the notability criteria as it relates to how the series was aired across its respective television networks. One's personal opinion regarding such broadcast information is irrelevant, as TV broadcast info about a television series is most certainly relevant and notable to the article's subject. Please do not bring your personal opinion to Wikipedia articles, as Wikipedia is not a soapboax. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 03:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
There is a big difference between common sense and personal opinion. I believe my statements are not propaganda, not self-promotion, and not advertising, hence I do not see why you are invoking the soapbox argument. I've asked for third party opinion for this section, because no new arguments are being invoked and I am still not at all convinced. --Darkbane 04:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
This is a television series, so broadcast information relating to the series' airing and broadcast runs are definitely relevant to the article's subject - this is as obvious and clear as it goes. The notability and relevance of this section is clearly detailed in the various policy guidelines regarding notability and relevance, so I would direct you to kindly read these. It would be much better to seek to add new sections to the article and improve it in that regard instead of wasting time over such a clear matter as this. If you wish to speak about "common sense", broadcast information relating to a television series is most certainly relevant. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 04:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
That's honestly the first reasonable argument I've heard from you on this page. You should have started with this. But rest assured that I am not wasting time as this topic needs some attention and only requires a very minuscule fraction of my time. "Cleary detailed" is not the case, since those guidelines do not contain any information about "broadcast information". --Darkbane 09:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to forget about this issue for now. At the end of the day, it really is as you say: it's not that important. --Darkbane 10:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Having now placed dozens of CSD A7 speedy tags, I've come to appreciate that any neutral content that provides out-of-universe insight into an anime project is potentially important, and hence I've drastically revised my understanding about the importance of broadcast information and cast and staff listings. Those sections need to stay. ^_^ --Darkbane 00:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Video Games?

Erm, a question. There's a new section stating that Code Geass video games are coming to the DS and Wii. Is there a source for this? This is almost an "oh boy oh boy" thing for me than anything else, but without any cited sources I remain skeptical.76.106.44.17 07:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Code Geass will be adapted into a series of video games to be published on the Nintendo DS, PSP and Wii. This has been reported by several well-known Japanese news sources, such as Nintendo iNSIDE and numerous others, which have now been added to the article. This is also stated on the Japanese wiki article for Code Geass, from which this section was translated. It should also be noted that several popular anime series are often adapted into video games in Japan, especially Sunrise's series. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 11:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

New albums article

I've created a List of Code Geass albums article, listing and detailing each of the albums released for Code Geass, including the original soundtracks and drama CDs. I'll try to expand upon the series and its related media, concepts and other material further as well. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 21:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Episode 24 & 25's Airing Times

It's been announced at the anime's main page the airing times of the 24th and 25th episodes. However, I can't read Japanese well enough to understand more than the gist of what the page is saying. The part keeping me from adding the times to the page is the fact that three dates and times are listed. Could someone verify which should be listed on the article and make the appropriate change? ~~ Ryalla 08:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, besides saying it will air in summer of this year, it does not mention the exact dates. I think those dates you see are the section about BIGLOBE accepting applications for something. DarkAngel007 22:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Those are the dates for the special screenings they're doing. Invite-only. Moogy (talk) 03:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

24+25 Theme song

The new Geass theme song for episodes 24+25 was announced in its official site: OP ED section. So, if someone wants to add that somewhere on the article.... It's called "Hitomi no Tsubasa", by access. DarkAngel007 22:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

WTF, it still reads like a list and it still looks like crap

The article completely lacks any organization at all, the list of staff takes up half the page, and there's tons of 1-sentence subsections. Please rewrite the article so it reads like a sane human being wrote it.--Frenchman113 on wheels! 03:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)